 |
|
Research Training in Otolaryngology: Is It Time to Refocus Our Efforts?—Reply
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In reply
We certainly agree with Dr Gillespie that the crisis facing research training in otolaryngology involves both basic and clinical research venues, which we acknowledged in our recommendations for long-range planning.1
Dr Gillespie correctly identifies a number of issues that may help in the future development of the clinical investigator, including the fact that clinical research skills can be acquired earlier in residency and still be useful many years after completion of clinical training. This differs somewhat from the acquisition of basic research skills, which rely heavily on cutting-edge technologic advances and become as quickly outdated and inadequate in a competitive funding environment. We also recognize the benefit of government efforts to increase the attractiveness of long research training periods with increases in trainee stipends and the loan repayment program.
We agree with his observation that time and faculty support are necessary to make clinical research programs successful. To . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Gregory T. Wolf, MD
Department of Otolaryngology
University of Michigan
1904 Taubman Center
1500 E Medical Center Dr
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0312
Ernest A. Weymuller, MD
Ann Arbor
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Research Training in Otolaryngology: Is It Time to Refocus Our Efforts?
M. Boyd Gillespie
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;129(12):1349-1350.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
